Welcome To The FECC Forum - More than 30 Million visitors can't be wrong

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sat May 12, 2012 10:05 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:

Kingcandids wrote:ekenee, you are 100% correct, Parker had nothing to do with Elvis not doing the film...

Facts:Streisand and Peters wanted Elvis in the part.Elvis wanted to do the part.Management killed the opportunity for a number of reasons, all short-sighted and self-serving.Two years later, Elvis was dead.

The above bolded statement should read "Elvis initially wanted to do the part."

I ultimately think Elvis simply changed his mind about taking on the role opposite Streisand. Had Elvis kept up his enthusiasm for the project, I have no doubt the project would have came to fruition with Elvis rather than Kris Kristofferson.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sat May 12, 2012 10:36 pm

Daryl wrote:I have no doubt the project would have came to fruition with Elvis rather than Kris Kristofferson.

I do. There was a dutchman that should have been a flying dutchman.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sat May 12, 2012 11:04 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:

Kingcandids wrote:ekenee, you are 100% correct, Parker had nothing to do with Elvis not doing the film...

Facts:Streisand and Peters wanted Elvis in the part.Elvis wanted to do the part.Management killed the opportunity for a number of reasons, all short-sighted and self-serving.Two years later, Elvis was dead.

This was a pivotal time in Elvis' life and career. He needed a challenge, he needed motivation, he needed a change. Barbara Striesand and ASIB would have provided all 3! The Colonel took it away from him. Great movie or not, it was a huge success!

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sun May 13, 2012 4:25 am

if Elvis had pushed hard for it to happen it would have happened. he changed his mind. Elvis proved in the past he could make things happen if he wanted it bad enough. can't blame the colonel for everything.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sun May 13, 2012 8:26 am

stevelecher wrote:What a defeatist post Juan. I would like to think the film would have found Elvis cleaning up his game a little. The attitude you display is very cold towards Elvis as a person. If The Colenel cared about his client he would have tried to get him interested in his life and career again. He wouldn't just keep him on the same path to destruction he was clearly on. The movie clearly would have required a little more discipline from Elvis than he was displaying since 1972.

No. It was a bad movie. Only made money for Streisands soundtrack. I just do not agree that was going to be Elvis' 70's comeback movie. Cause it was terrible. Parker was right! PS. Can anyone watch it without getting bored?!

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sun May 13, 2012 1:30 pm

Juan Luis wrote:No. It was a bad movie. Only made money for Streisands soundtrack. I just do not agree that was going to be Elvis' 70's comeback movie. Cause it was terrible. Parker was right! PS. Can anyone watch it without getting bored?!

The film and soundtrack were a HUGE success. This is a fact, no matter what your personal feelings are about it. And had Elvis taken the role that went to Kristofferson he would have been better than Kris, and the publicity would have been very, very good for him personally and professionally. Elvis lived for and rose to special occasions. This would have been a special occasion.

As for the soundtrack, management would have guaranteed a minimum 50/50 split of all profits.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sun May 13, 2012 5:59 pm

This was the 3rd version of this movie.

Leonard Martin calls it "an unconvincing treatment" of this story.

As previously said, it was boring.

The hype was more than the success of this movie.

Since it was an old Judy Garland vehicle, there was some big expectations, and since it was Barbra, people expected alot as well.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sun May 13, 2012 6:04 pm

All the people that think the movie is "boring" should probably "watch closely now"!

I enjoyed the movie, although Kris Kristofferson singing a rock song just doesn't feel right to me (don't get me wrong, I love Kris' music).

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sun May 13, 2012 6:06 pm

DEH wrote:if Elvis had pushed hard for it to happen it would have happened. he changed his mind. Elvis proved in the past he could make things happen if he wanted it bad enough. can't blame the colonel for everything.

Elvis in 1975, 76, wasn't the same man as who defied the Colonel's suggestions for both the 68 comeback special and the 69 sessions with Chips. Elvis had many more issues, health wise, as well as his bouts with depression. He needed guidance, none was given by the man who supposedly had his "best interests" at heart.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sun May 13, 2012 11:46 pm

Joe Car wrote:

DEH wrote:if Elvis had pushed hard for it to happen it would have happened. he changed his mind. Elvis proved in the past he could make things happen if he wanted it bad enough. can't blame the colonel for everything.

Elvis in 1975, 76, wasn't the same man as who defied the Colonel's suggestions for both the 68 comeback special and the 69 sessions with Chips. Elvis had many more issues, health wise, as well as his bouts with depression. He needed guidance, none was given by the man who supposedly had his "best interests" at heart.

As i said earlier in the thread we don't know that in this case.

Conflicting stories about whether Elvis would commit fully to doing the film.

Elvis still blew off the January 1977 recording sessions that the Colonel had scheduled.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon May 14, 2012 3:03 am

ekenee wrote:This was the 3rd version of this movie.

Leonard Martin calls it "an unconvincing treatment" of this story.

As previously said, it was boring.

The hype was more than the success of this movie.

Since it was an old Judy Garland vehicle, there was some big expectations, and since it was Barbra, people expected alot as well.

I think there is more to it than this. It wasn't just a case that this was an old Judy Garland vehicle, but the fact that it turned her career around. While her "concert years" had started a couple of years earlier with her season at the recently re-opened Palace Theatre, it was through the near-three hours of A Star Is Born that this second career of hers really kicked off. It was Garland's first film in five years and earned her a well-earned Oscar nomination and Golden Globe win, and the publicity and generally favourable reviews led to her being rewarded with 2 TV specials (in 1955 and 56 respectively) and a recording contract with Capitol records, home to the likes of Sinatra, Nat King Cole, Dick Haymes and more.

By the time Elvis's name would have been linked to a remake, the Garland version had become both legendary and mythical due to nearly forty minutes having been cut from the film between test showings and its general release. Presumably spurred on because of Garland's death in 1969, and the development through the 1960s and early 1970s of film studies as a "legit" academic discipline centring on classical Hollywood cinema, interest rose in finding the lost footage and restoring it - this was the same period when the first attempts at restoring the equally-mythical (because of lost footage) Metropolis were being made. The restoration didn't take place until the early 1980s, though, when various sound and visual elements were combined to make a 176 minute restoration (still missing around 18 minutes). About a minute of extra footage (the song When My Sugar Walks Down The Street) was found after this, but has yet to be added into the film itself - it is currently an extra on the DVD.

Interestingly, when Presley's name was first associated with A Star is Born, he would have been away from narrative cinema for 5 years (the same time Garland had when her version was released). And, like Garland, he had moved away from a busy film schedule and turned a just as busy a schedule on the concert stage - and by 1974 his concerts were becoming as unpredicatable as hers became. Considering what the third film version had done for Garland's career, it's hardly surprising that people got excited about the possibility of Presley being in the remake, and whether it would rejuvenate his career in the same way.

I'm not sure if anyone else has mentioned it, but the 1976 version of the film was actually the FOURTH not the THIRD version of the story. The first "Star Is Born" from 1937 was in itself a remake of "What Price Hollywood" from 1932. And we are going to be treated to a new version next year - with current rumours circulating that Beyonce with take the Garland/Streisand role with Tom Cruise playing the Mason/Kristofferson role. Clint Eastwood is to direct according to latest reports.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon May 14, 2012 5:21 am

poormadpeter wrote:

ekenee wrote:This was the 3rd version of this movie.

Leonard Martin calls it "an unconvincing treatment" of this story.

As previously said, it was boring.

The hype was more than the success of this movie.

Since it was an old Judy Garland vehicle, there was some big expectations, and since it was Barbra, people expected alot as well.

I think there is more to it than this. It wasn't just a case that this was an old Judy Garland vehicle, but the fact that it turned her career around. While her "concert years" had started a couple of years earlier with her season at the recently re-opened Palace Theatre, it was through the near-three hours of A Star Is Born that this second career of hers really kicked off. It was Garland's first film in five years and earned her a well-earned Oscar nomination and Golden Globe win, and the publicity and generally favourable reviews led to her being rewarded with 2 TV specials (in 1955 and 56 respectively) and a recording contract with Capitol records, home to the likes of Sinatra, Nat King Cole, Dick Haymes and more.

By the time Elvis's name would have been linked to a remake, the Garland version had become both legendary and mythical due to nearly forty minutes having been cut from the film between test showings and its general release. Presumably spurred on because of Garland's death in 1969, and the development through the 1960s and early 1970s of film studies as a "legit" academic discipline centring on classical Hollywood cinema, interest rose in finding the lost footage and restoring it - this was the same period when the first attempts at restoring the equally-mythical (because of lost footage) Metropolis were being made. The restoration didn't take place until the early 1980s, though, when various sound and visual elements were combined to make a 176 minute restoration (still missing around 18 minutes). About a minute of extra footage (the song When My Sugar Walks Down The Street) was found after this, but has yet to be added into the film itself - it is currently an extra on the DVD.

Interestingly, when Presley's name was first associated with A Star is Born, he would have been away from narrative cinema for 5 years (the same time Garland had when her version was released). And, like Garland, he had moved away from a busy film schedule and turned a just as busy a schedule on the concert stage - and by 1974 his concerts were becoming as unpredicatable as hers became. Considering what the third film version had done for Garland's career, it's hardly surprising that people got excited about the possibility of Presley being in the remake, and whether it would rejuvenate his career in the same way.

I'm not sure if anyone else has mentioned it, but the 1976 version of the film was actually the FOURTH not the THIRD version of the story. The first "Star Is Born" from 1937 was in itself a remake of "What Price Hollywood" from 1932. And we are going to be treated to a new version next year - with current rumours circulating that Beyonce with take the Garland/Streisand role with Tom Cruise playing the Mason/Kristofferson role. Clint Eastwood is to direct according to latest reports.

What if, just what if.....Barbara Striesand had nothing to do with this project.

One of Elvis' most successful movies was "Viva Las vegas" with Ann-Margret.

And Hollywood never tried to repeat that great chemistry. Why? Were they clueless?

Flash 11-12 years forward.

If it was Ann Margret coming to Elvis wanting to remake "A star is born", I think he would have went thru with it.

Now THAT would have been something to witness. Can you image Elvis and Ann back to gether again for the movie?

It would have been huge.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon May 14, 2012 5:57 am

ekenee wrote:What if, just what if.....Barbara Striesand had nothing to do with this project.

One of Elvis' most successful movies was "Viva Las vegas" with Ann-Margret.

And Hollywood never tried to repeat that great chemistry. Why? Were they clueless?

Flash 11-12 years forward.

If it was Ann Margret coming to Elvis wanting to remake "A star is born", I think he would have went thru with it.

Now THAT would have been something to witness. Can you image Elvis and Ann back to gether again for the movie?

It would have been huge.

Wow! Now that's an interesting thought!

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon May 14, 2012 10:36 am

Juan Luis wrote:With all due respect to the Doc and others. I for whatever reason am glad Elvis turned down a succesful but crappy film. Only helped Streisands musical career. Not much would have done to the has been strung out character Elvis would have played. Too close to the truth maybe? My take anyway...

Well, it did wonders for Kris Kristofferson's movie career! He had quite a run of successful, roles after it.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon May 14, 2012 12:58 pm

poormadpeter wrote:

ekenee wrote:This was the 3rd version of this movie.

Leonard Martin calls it "an unconvincing treatment" of this story.

As previously said, it was boring.

The hype was more than the success of this movie.

Since it was an old Judy Garland vehicle, there was some big expectations, and since it was Barbra, people expected alot as well.

I think there is more to it than this. It wasn't just a case that this was an old Judy Garland vehicle, but the fact that it turned her career around. While her "concert years" had started a couple of years earlier with her season at the recently re-opened Palace Theatre, it was through the near-three hours of A Star Is Born that this second career of hers really kicked off. It was Garland's first film in five years and earned her a well-earned Oscar nomination and Golden Globe win, and the publicity and generally favourable reviews led to her being rewarded with 2 TV specials (in 1955 and 56 respectively) and a recording contract with Capitol records, home to the likes of Sinatra, Nat King Cole, Dick Haymes and more.

By the time Elvis's name would have been linked to a remake, the Garland version had become both legendary and mythical due to nearly forty minutes having been cut from the film between test showings and its general release. Presumably spurred on because of Garland's death in 1969, and the development through the 1960s and early 1970s of film studies as a "legit" academic discipline centring on classical Hollywood cinema, interest rose in finding the lost footage and restoring it - this was the same period when the first attempts at restoring the equally-mythical (because of lost footage) Metropolis were being made. The restoration didn't take place until the early 1980s, though, when various sound and visual elements were combined to make a 176 minute restoration (still missing around 18 minutes). About a minute of extra footage (the song When My Sugar Walks Down The Street) was found after this, but has yet to be added into the film itself - it is currently an extra on the DVD.

Interestingly, when Presley's name was first associated with A Star is Born, he would have been away from narrative cinema for 5 years (the same time Garland had when her version was released). And, like Garland, he had moved away from a busy film schedule and turned a just as busy a schedule on the concert stage - and by 1974 his concerts were becoming as unpredicatable as hers became. Considering what the third film version had done for Garland's career, it's hardly surprising that people got excited about the possibility of Presley being in the remake, and whether it would rejuvenate his career in the same way.

I'm not sure if anyone else has mentioned it, but the 1976 version of the film was actually the FOURTH not the THIRD version of the story. The first "Star Is Born" from 1937 was in itself a remake of "What Price Hollywood" from 1932. And we are going to be treated to a new version next year - with current rumours circulating that Beyonce with take the Garland/Streisand role with Tom Cruise playing the Mason/Kristofferson role. Clint Eastwood is to direct according to latest reports.

Thanks for the info Peter, I was just wondering about the planned remake (read this quite a while ago).

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon May 14, 2012 2:52 pm

Ann-Margret would never have been suitable for the role, from the point of view of either the producers or the audience. While she had appeared in serious roles on film and Oscar-nominated for Carnal Knowledge (1971), she would not have brought the necessary gravitas to the film that Streisand could - a singer who made her name in one of the best musical dramas ever made. Ann-Margret also didn't have the singing ability that Streisand (or Cher) had, being much more associated with lightweight fare.

From Presley's point of view, would he have wanted to star opposite Ann-Margret again, and in this case in the less showy role? Unlikely. It would have meant harking back to his previous Hollywood career, something he was making jokes about in 1969 in Vegas and had tried to forget ever since. And no doubt he was hoping audiences would forget about it too - he wouldn't have wanted that image resurrected.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon May 14, 2012 10:52 pm

I think Ann Margret could have handled the acting just fine and the chemistry with Elvis would have been good.

I agree that her singing abilities weren't up to par and she never was the box office draw that Streisand was.

I disagree with ekenee that the movie would have been huge.

Just because Viva Las Vegas was hit in 1964 doesn't mean another movie with them 12 years later was going to be a hit.

I think Elvis would have been open to working with her again if the script had been good.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon May 14, 2012 11:47 pm

brian wrote:I think Ann Margret could have handled the acting just fine and the chemistry with Elvis would have been good.

I agree that her singing abilities weren't up to par and she never was the box office draw that Streisand was.

I disagree with ekenee that the movie would have been huge.

Just because Viva Las Vegas was hit in 1964 doesn't mean another movie with them 12 years later was going to be a hit.

I think Elvis would have been open to working with her again if the script had been good.

Ann could have been a real motivation for him.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue May 15, 2012 12:43 am

I realize that the Colonel gets vilified for Elvis not taking on the role in the remake of "A Star Is Born" but I ultimately think the decision was Elvis' to make. I think what happened is that Elvis basically had made his mind up not to do the film so he told the Colonel to quote Streisand and Peters a price that was so far out of their ballpark that they would never agree to it. Colonel used this same strategy on possible tours outside the U.S., etc. But I ultimately think Elvis made the final decision and passed word onto the Colonel about it. This strategy that Elvis and the Colonel used is the exact reason why the Colonel gets vilified to this very day. Had Streisand and Peters come back and said, "yeah, we'll do it for that price / those stipulations, it would have been a win / win for everyone.

Daryl

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue May 15, 2012 1:23 am

Daryl wrote:. Had Streisand and Peters come back and said, "yeah, we'll do it for that price / those stipulations, it would have been a win / win for everyone.

Daryl

Except Elvis might still not have committed to it and the Colonel would still find an excuse to say no.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue May 15, 2012 1:27 am

Considering Elvis's unwillingness to take risks by this point either in the studio or on stage, could it be he simply didn't want to make the effort of making a film? That he no longer had the ambition.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue May 15, 2012 2:45 am

brian wrote:I think Ann Margret could have handled the acting just fine and the chemistry with Elvis would have been good.

I agree that her singing abilities weren't up to par and she never was the box office draw that Streisand was.

I disagree with ekenee that the movie would have been huge.

Just because Viva Las Vegas was hit in 1964 doesn't mean another movie with them 12 years later was going to be a hit.

I think Elvis would have been open to working with her again if the script had been good.

Any piece of crap that Elvis would have tackled later on would have been huge. Simply put, the fans hadn't seen Elvis in the movies for 5 years, and they would have all bought ticketsjust to see it. Comebacks are strange in that, they usually start off great, but it is up to the artist to keep the ball rolling. It's the second venture after a comeback that is usually the real test.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue May 15, 2012 2:49 am

ekenee wrote:

brian wrote:I think Ann Margret could have handled the acting just fine and the chemistry with Elvis would have been good.

I agree that her singing abilities weren't up to par and she never was the box office draw that Streisand was.

I disagree with ekenee that the movie would have been huge.

Just because Viva Las Vegas was hit in 1964 doesn't mean another movie with them 12 years later was going to be a hit.

I think Elvis would have been open to working with her again if the script had been good.

Any piece of crap that Elvis would have tackled later on would have been huge. .

I don't think that would have necessarily been the case.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sun Sep 09, 2012 3:05 pm

Elvis was perfect for the role. Could be a very big challenge for him (maybe the last one!) A rock star in decline (he could play a lot better then Kris Kristofferson because he was playng himself). Like it or not, the movie and the music LP were huge hits. The only problem I saw: it was not fair in the offer to give Elvis only 10% from the profits. In this case the Colonel was right to change it at 50%. It's not exagerated at all.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sun Sep 09, 2012 9:48 pm

jurasic1968 wrote:Elvis was perfect for the role. Could be a very big challenge for him (maybe the last one!) A rock star in decline (he could play a lot better then Kris Kristofferson because he was playng himself). Like it or not, the movie and the music LP were huge hits. The only problem I saw: it was not fair in the offer to give Elvis only 10% from the profits. In this case the Colonel was right to change it at 50%. It's not exagerated at all.

Elvis had not had a substantial hit at the cinema box office since Viva Las Vegas; he was no longer a box office draw at the cinema - no-one in their right mind would offer such a percentage to Presley, especially with the rumours of ill health, dependencies on medications and eccentric behaviour on stage.